Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: The future of medium format  (Read 19751 times)
Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1116


WWW
« Reply #100 on: December 15, 2012, 12:43:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Runway is static? LOL

Kid jumping in the air is static? LOL

Bill no question for those guys 35mm is king. I'm not trying to say that in the slightest. What i am saying for a lot of gigs things are possible with MF. Its not all about landscape shooters on tripods. I even shot a Golf tourney with MF. I cant get 6 fps per second but i can get the decisive moment. From my days guys shot speed graphics for sports, so its not always about 6 fps per second or long lenses but about getting the decisive moment too. Also MF is pretty limited to long focal length as 300mm being about the Max with AF capability. I agree its not a MF world with high end sports. i would much rather shoot Nikon or Canon and there fine long glass ( really would not have much of a choice) and if I shot sports for a living. Than i would certainly be shooting that. Basically this points out your not out in the cold all the time with MF, Sensor plus does bring a interesting and valuable option to the party. I would not read into that any further than what i just said. Each system will always have there strengths, no question about it. Sports is a 35mm world but I do like bucking the rules a lot. LOL
« Last Edit: December 15, 2012, 12:50:59 PM by Guy Mancuso » Logged

Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1116


WWW
« Reply #101 on: December 15, 2012, 12:56:16 PM »
ReplyReply

"Horses for courses".

Yes, absolutely! The problem with many of these threads is that they turn into which is better DSLR or MFDB, erroneously proposing that a photographer could only have one camera.  There will always be situations where one is better suited than another.
 

Where did I say one can do everything, I did in my review that 35mm would be better suited for this type of work. There is no question about that, I am just one stubborn ass photographer that will do crazy stuff and shoot anything with any gear. Cuss I 'm nuts enough to try it. ROTFLMAO

This is my signature on GetDPI its something I believe in.

Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2012, 01:06:03 PM by Guy Mancuso » Logged

EricWHiss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2426



WWW
« Reply #102 on: December 15, 2012, 01:32:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Guy,
my post was not directed to you as are a working photographer .... but rather the non-shooters, the analytical folks who savor every chance to talk bits, post charts and pixel peep.  I'm not saying all that is bad, because we need people like that, but often its a myopic view of what photography is about.  A more complete picture would include both the science and the working experience with maybe the science taking a supporting role since now all the cameras are quite capable enough. e.g.. I'm actually quite impressed with my n808 camera phone.
Logged

Authorized Rolleiflex Dealer:
Find product information, download user manuals, or purchase online - Rolleiflex USA
Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1116


WWW
« Reply #103 on: December 15, 2012, 01:51:31 PM »
ReplyReply

LOL

I agree science should be more a supporting role as the actually reality of shooting is the more important aspect. But I agree science is our backbone so still very important. I guess one problem for the artist is we can't see science as we are more visual oriented. We have to have both and a good balance as well.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7700


WWW
« Reply #104 on: December 15, 2012, 02:57:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Just to point out, this thread started from discussing technical cameras, the Hartblei HCam and the Alpa FPS, both lacking mirror. Quite a few of those taking part in the discussion are perfectly aware of the flipping mirror issue, this is actually one of the reason we consider live view a necessity. With live view you don't need the mirror!

Personally I always use MLU when the camera is on tripod. My latest cameras have fixed translucent mirror, so I need to do some rethink.

Best regards
Erik



Of course if you only are interested in discussing the technology, then you don't need a camera at all. Unfortunately for those folks, they miss out on how important the usability of the gear is, the character of the resulting images, and only see the easily quantifiable data.   As an example, mirror vibration is still a big issue for both formats that is overlooked (d800 and mamiya DF included).
Logged

Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1116


WWW
« Reply #105 on: December 15, 2012, 04:47:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Just to point out, this thread started from discussing technical cameras, the Hartblei HCam and the Alpa FPS, both lacking mirror. Quite a few of those taking part in the discussion are perfectly aware of the flipping mirror issue, this is actually one of the reason we consider live view a necessity. With live view you don't need the mirror!

Personally I always use MLU when the camera is on tripod. My latest cameras have fixed translucent mirror, so I need to do some rethink.

Best regards
Erik




Honestly as much as I would like to see no mirror and live view. I'm just not sure I want to give up a optical finder. I hated every EVF setup to date that I tried. Not all of them but it really bugs me. Not sure what it is.

I guess the question here that we may need to address as well . Will technology actually progress to a point it's more accepted to the buyer. I know many facets to that question but my believe is no. It's going to take several things one being costs and I'm still not sure we can drive that down.

Now a close friend who is a dealer said to me once. If you can give me a MF system like a phase or Hassy for 10k back, body and lens at 50-60 mpx easy to use I can sell them pretty easily to just about every portrait shooter and wedding guy. Interesting comment but how do we get there. Technology great but driving costs down to that level would take more. The Alpa FPS is 10k no back and no lens. Okay different animal but not going to fly off the shelf either. Admit love to have one as they are nice.
Logged

Gel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 159


Excuse me while I bust a cap


« Reply #106 on: December 15, 2012, 06:05:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Simple Guy, they need to lower their margins and stop carving rebranded cameras out of one piece of aluminium. Cheesy

In the case of Hasselblad and the Phase DF, these are now very old bodies, manufacturing these must be a simpler cheaper process now.
Other than upgrading the circuit bards the model upgrades seem minimal.

I can't see where 18k (UK) for a body back and lens comes from. Really I don't.

Logged

Chris Giles Photography
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7700


WWW
« Reply #107 on: December 15, 2012, 10:26:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Regarding the OVF/EVF I agree in part, having both, but keep in mind that we had OVFs for just a few years while SLRs have been around for 80 years or so. EVF has long development ahead. But EVF solves many problems and lovers cost or increases margins.

On MFD I see live view more as a feature of the back. You want to put the MFD on either an SLR or on a technical camera and I see live view as a perfect match for the technical camera.

I don't think contrast sensing live view AF is coming to MF any soon. My understanding is MF a niche market and resources need to be wisely spent.

Regarding MFD for 10 k$US it seems to be possible, I guess that you can buy a Pentax 645D with standard lens at B&H for that price, and it is my understanding it is a fine camera. I don't know how it is selling.

As a final thought, it is quite natural for MF to be expensive. You need big sensors, and the lenses need to be relatively large. What I would love to see would be backs refurbished by manufacturer that lowers the cost of entry.

Best regards
Erik



Honestly as much as I would like to see no mirror and live view. I'm just not sure I want to give up a optical finder. I hated every EVF setup to date that I tried. Not all of them but it really bugs me. Not sure what it is.

I guess the question here that we may need to address as well . Will technology actually progress to a point it's more accepted to the buyer. I know many facets to that question but my believe is no. It's going to take several things one being costs and I'm still not sure we can drive that down.

Now a close friend who is a dealer said to me once. If you can give me a MF system like a phase or Hassy for 10k back, body and lens at 50-60 mpx easy to use I can sell them pretty easily to just about every portrait shooter and wedding guy. Interesting comment but how do we get there. Technology great but driving costs down to that level would take more. The Alpa FPS is 10k no back and no lens. Okay different animal but not going to fly off the shelf either. Admit love to have one as they are nice.
Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #108 on: December 16, 2012, 03:06:37 AM »
ReplyReply

The RAW files are there, you can check them and draw your own conclusions

Yaya can you explain whey your two 100 ISO raw conversion files look like this:



But Erick's conversions look the same?



I downloaded the two iso 100 raw files too... they look the same just as Erick's conversion.


« Last Edit: December 16, 2012, 03:11:16 AM by FredBGG » Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7700


WWW
« Reply #109 on: December 16, 2012, 03:17:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Excessive sharpening would cause that kind of grittiness, but if I apply same sharpening on P645D image and D800E image I get similar grittiness on both.

Best regards
Erik





Yaya can you explain whey your two 100 ISO raw conversion files look like this:



But Erick's conversions look the same?



I downloaded the two iso 100 raw files too... they look the same just as Erick's conversion.



Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #110 on: December 16, 2012, 04:01:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Sensor plus is quite good and I have used it many times when maybe a 35mm cam may have been a better choice. Personally I find comments like MF can't do this cant do that and is slow to work with a little misleading. Sometimes I may agree with that but again I also find it very overblown comments. Here is a whole review on Sensor plus I did some time ago. Low light stage work all done with sensor plus both handheld and monopod and BTW I use the same techniques as I would with 35mm. Again photography is more about solving issues and working with gear and using it the best you can . I rarely ever found MF limitations I could not deal with. Both focusing , speed , handheld ability all come down to you as the shooter on how you deal with the system within your hands. I will say the more experienced you are the better success you will have working within those limitations of a system. Every system is a compromise, its how you as the shooter deal with it. Obviously some folks will fail and some will succeed , again knowing your system and making it work to its advantages and knowing the disadvantages the more success you will have. Check this out on sensor plus, its clean , it works and the files are great. I have shot these shows for years and my best looking files have come from sensor plus.

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/digital-camera-reviews/29252-phase-one-iq-160-sensor-plus-high-iso.html

While these are good images to show what the image quality of the Sensor + function are like I would advise readers here not to think that they are representative of mainstream Fashion runway


While these are good images to show what the image quality of the Sensor + function are like I would advise readers here not to think that they are representative of mainstream Fashion runway. Not to take anything way from the good shots Guy took, but there is a big difference between this IMTA talent show and Paris, Milan or NY fashion runway. Both the conditions and the photography required. I very much doubt that the same camera Phase One DF and IQ160 could handle what it required.

First of all you are unlikely to have so much light. I've shot Milan and Paris shows
1/320th f7.1 at ISO 800 not really a low light situation.
Also the light is likely to be much flatter. The lighting at most fashion shows is much softer and would be harder for the DF to focus.
Lighting for the major fashion shows is set up primarily for TV.

A quick search to show what I mean:


Gianfranco Ferre Spring 2009 Fashion Show in Milan.
Try focusing that with the single center focus point of the DF.


GUCCI MILAN FASHION WEEK  ISO 800 1/400th f3.5 (that's about 2 stops darker than the IMTA talent show.

This video is a good indication of the lighting you will get as well as the fast pace.
http://youtu.be/ylcPqmZ4ESw

http://youtu.be/_6g5D2DDt5w
Christian Serrano fashion show.

The designers often go for more atmosphere and less light. The light is likely to go up and down through the show.
For this reason you need to have selectable spot metering and focus points.

Then there is what it required image wise. Most magazines want shallow depth of field for cleaner
layouts of 4 or more photos per page.
Also the magazines what head shot, half shot, shoes and multiples of full length.
The shows are fast paced and last 7 to 20 minutes. The pace required is much faster than the 2,000 shots Guy took in three hours.
If the photographer is shooting for a magazine he or she will most likely shoot 6 to 10 shows in a day.

Then there is the issue of delivery. You will have to include custom data in the exif data. Designer, copyright etc.
Files need to be made available right away. Jpegs have to be ready to go. There is not time for the photographer to edit
out shots out of focus. For this reason the focus hit rate has to be very high.

This is clearly a job that a MF digital can't handle however skilled the photographer is and sensor plus won't change that.
This is a job for the high speed 10+ fps Canon and Nikons. With dual high speed card slots, stabilized lenses and built for combat.

All I'm saying here is that what may have worked at the IMTA talent show with 3 shots per model an 2,000 shots in 3 hours (that's about 1 shot every 5 seconds average)
won't work at a Paris, Milan or NY fashion show.

My point here is that the way many jobs are shot is changing fast and that Sensor plus is a very small step forward that isn't keeping pace with the speed
of progress else where. To not make comparisons with other tools available is  like sticking your head in the sand.

The MF world has to understand that as image quality of 35mm increases fast by while taking all other performance level and features with it
the market will get used to those conditions of working.



« Last Edit: December 16, 2012, 12:48:43 PM by FredBGG » Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #111 on: December 16, 2012, 04:28:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Excessive sharpening would cause that kind of grittiness, but if I apply same sharpening on P645D image and D800E image I get similar grittiness on both.

Best regards
Erik

But the image is not sharper..... lips lost detail.

HuhHuh? Something isn't right....




Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7700


WWW
« Reply #112 on: December 16, 2012, 04:48:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Fred,

Thanks for giving insight into fashion world.

I would suggest that we don't need to discuss where MF had been, but where MF needs to go.

The way I see it, Guy essentially said that he was shooting that kind of pictures and that Sensor+ was helpful.

Best regards
Erik
Logged

JohnCox123
Guest
« Reply #113 on: December 16, 2012, 05:39:29 AM »
ReplyReply

One thing I would really like to see is a universal back system (or close to it). I'd like to be able to use my Mamiya back on a Hasselblad (V/H) or technical camera when the situation comes up. I know we have that to some extent with adaptors but there are limits. Sinar makes their backs adaptable to most brands so I assume it can be done by everyone else.

In the past the Graflock backs were used fairly universally for 4x5 cameras and Hasselblad has taken up this role largely with the V system now. I'd like to see this expand or updated.
Logged
Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1116


WWW
« Reply #114 on: December 16, 2012, 06:25:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Fred,

Thanks for giving insight into fashion world.

I would suggest that we don't need to discuss where MF had been, but where MF needs to go.

The way I see it, Guy essentially said that he was shooting that kind of pictures and that Sensor+ was helpful.

Best regards
Erik

Thanks Erik. Missed in my report is I could have shot a lot faster , I chose to shoot slower. I have to process this stuff. Agree bad part on MF is your not shooting jpegs so I put a limit on how many I shot. They walk the same speed as the big fashion shows and I could have even had less light and shot at 5.6 or even 4.5 if needed. Also I agree MF is maybe not the best tool and I said that several times now but it's a workable system and I use single AF point regardless of system. I do exactly the same thing with a Nikon single point continuous focusing. Yes the DF can do continuous. Once again let's beat up MF because we can attitude comments. Lost in this is of course is the possibilities of MF although it does have its limit in scoop. Never said it didn't.

Again another thread of what MF negative comments. How can you build a future for it when we constantly get barraged by 35mm. Obviously my whole point taken completely out of context. I had enough, have a great Holiday everyone. I maybe the only one that has done a full report on sensor plus and since it was brought up thought I would share it so folks can understand it better. Again It's data that is useful but its also data for the zealots to pounce on. Same shit diffrent day. Lol

The interesting part of sensor plus is it can take on the role of limited 35 DSLR world given its scope of course where one may not need to have a 35mm on hand or at every job. It serves as a good smaller file higher ISO and faster speed option when you really need it in the field. I like to see this type of binning in the future of MF and maybe it could be a even better option with a CMOS sensor that would already have a higher ISO value on it. One other thing the back is much faster in recycle shooting times going to sensor plus. Not all of us want to have two systems all the time in the field so this gives you a essentially a faster option when needed.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2012, 06:55:08 AM by Guy Mancuso » Logged

design_freak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1074



« Reply #115 on: December 16, 2012, 09:48:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Hmmm, I'm disappointed. Again, the subject turned into a MF vs 35mm . At best, it ends in self-admiration. Where are all specialists in MFDB? You are not aware of the weaknesses of your product? Your products are perfect? You may want to fine-tune the elements, which are currently the weakest elements, and then to deal with the switch to the new sensors.
I appreciate very much that such small companies as Alpa, Arca-Swiss  or HARTBLEI are able to set trends, in spite of the scarce resources which they have. I do not know how to read the market, but apparently there are the right people in the right place.
Logged

Best regards,
DF

-------------------------------------------
WORK HARD AND BE NICE TO PEOPLE
-------------------------------------------
alan_b
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77


WWW
« Reply #116 on: December 16, 2012, 11:18:01 AM »
ReplyReply

When(?) live-view arrives for MFD, I'd love to see a split-screen feature.  I'd like to zoom in to two selectable areas for checking DOF and tilt/swing.

I'd also like to see backs that don't require $8k retrofocus wides to avoid color casts on tech cameras.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #117 on: December 16, 2012, 11:22:13 AM »
ReplyReply

One thing I would really like to see is a universal back system (or close to it). I'd like to be able to use my Mamiya back on a Hasselblad (V/H) or technical camera when the situation comes up. I know we have that to some extent with adaptors but there are limits. Sinar makes their backs adaptable to most brands so I assume it can be done by everyone else.

In the past the Graflock backs were used fairly universally for 4x5 cameras and Hasselblad has taken up this role largely with the V system now. I'd like to see this expand or updated.




It would be wonderful if digital backs were made in the manner of film; as most know, there were standard sizes and they fitted everything made within those sizes, regardless of brand. Except that with digital (MF) they would be better settling on one maximum size that's feasible to produce. At least as a start.

It shouldn't take a genius to figure that if all the back/sensor/camera manufacturers got together, sat down and looked at the real world, they might, just might agree that getting back to an old, very successful formula would be no bad thing. The buyer base is relatively so small and the club so expensive to join that consolidation makes more sense than competition. Lack of competition wouldn't affect the buyers because it would be pretty much guaranteed by the manufacturers having to stay honest if only to hang on to market share within the greater competition offered by other formats.

The Mafia would have handled things better.

Rob C
Logged

FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #118 on: December 16, 2012, 12:16:29 PM »
ReplyReply

One other thing the back is much faster in recycle shooting times going to sensor plus. Not all of us want to have two systems all the time in the field so this gives you a essentially a faster option when needed.


Much faster?

0.7 (0.9 in Sensor+ ). In today's world of digital going from 0.7 frames per second to 0.9 frames per second isn't much faster.
You are also forced to shoot higher ISO range with sensor plus... this could be an issue in the field.

My point is that if sensor plus it to be taken as another example of the state of the art of medium format it reinforces the case for a drastic change in direction.

Dwelling on the benefits of how sensor plus and how it handles strongly light runway with a photographer with 30 plus years of experience in a thread about the future of
medium format isn't going anywhere. That is why I pointed out what the larger market requires and what the reality of mainstream runway is.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2012, 01:06:03 PM by FredBGG » Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #119 on: December 16, 2012, 12:47:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Fred,

Thanks for giving insight into fashion world.

I would suggest that we don't need to discuss where MF had been, but where MF needs to go.

The way I see it, Guy essentially said that he was shooting that kind of pictures and that Sensor+ was helpful.

Best regards
Erik

It's not about where MF has been. It's about where it is now and will be for several years due to the slow
product cycle and the far to gradual. MF did not need to keep an eye on 35mm DSLRs when for example Nikons top prosumer
camera was a 12mp camera with no video. When a big jump trippling MP count and adding much more dynamic range and uncompressed HD video happened in one product cycle
it's a totally different ball game.

Medium format has to make a similar large step or simply figure out how to operate in a ever smaller niche market and the resulting higher prices.
The large step needs to be in erganomics, functionality and scope. I find it interesting that it's the smallest new comer  Pentax to MF digital that is making
some of the biggest steps. Image stabalization, way more focus points,  far more advanced metering, weather sealing, fully supported TTL, High sped sync.....
and all for a lower price than the competition. Interestingly it comes from a company that makes 35mm and smaller DSLRs.

Lets look at a MF to MF comparison. The Pentax 645D shoots full 40MP at 1.1 fps. It has 11 focus points and far more advanced metering. It can also spit out Jpegs with in camera noise reduction. This would make it a better MF option for runway and closer to the state of the art for that type of shoot.

Price difference:
Pentax 645D  $8,796.95
Phase One IQ140  $$21,990.00 and that is just the back.

Pentax can achieve this in it's first MF digital camera thanks to its 35mm system know how. That is why 35mm systems are a relevant subject in the discussion of the future or MF.


« Last Edit: December 16, 2012, 01:24:54 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad